Sorry Sam but how am I supposed to make the devs aware of this hack if you just persist in locking every thread I post in, or deleting topics I start on the subject ?

You are clearly failing to grasp the concept of this one, and because you think your god, your just clicking buttons you evidently shouldn't have access too, grow the hell up and actually take a minute to read and attempt to understand it, for the love of god man.

I'll even say it in big letters for you as you don't seem to want to read lower case. For the record, I have been running LFS servers for at least as long as you have and I know what they are supposed to do, and what they are not supposed to do, so stop acting so overtly over officious and take the responsibility you were entrusted with seriously for a minute, instead of throwing your over bearing weight around.

1.THE SERVER IS SET TO 1 CAR PER GUEST

2.A DRIVER JOINED AND RELEASED MULTIPLE AI CARS ON TO THE TRACK AS WELL AS HIS OWN CAR

3.I HAVE TRIED TO REPRODUCE THIS BUT I CAN ONLY ADD A MAXIMUM OF 1 AI CAR, WHEN I TRY TO ADD ANOTHER OR JOIN MY SELF ONCE I HAVE AN AI ON THE TRACK I GET THE MESSAGE "Max guest cars : 1" SO I AM UNABLE TO ADD 2 AI CARS THEN JOIN MY SELF ON TOP OF THIS

4.BY HACKING 2 AI CARS PLUS HIM SELF ON TO THE TRACK, NO ONE WAS ABLE TO JOIN THE SERVER AS EVERYONE THAT TRIED GOT AN OOS - CP ERROR UNTIL WE BANNED THE GUY THAT WAS CAUSING IT

YOU SHOULD TRY and add multiple AI cars and then joining your self, on a server set to /carsguest=1, lets see if you still consider it 'not to be a hack'. Why the hell do you insist that this is stanadard behaviour of LFS ?

STOP LOCKING AND DELETING MY POSTS JUST BECAUSE YOU THINK YOUR GOD HERE, THIS IS A SERIOUS BUG / HACK IN LFS AND I AM TRYING TO POINT IT OUT SO IT GETS CLOSED.

If your not willing to help and put forward constructive suggestions, then I will thank you to say nothing at all, locking and deleting solves nothing and helps no one.

If you force me to contact the devs directly, then I will, stop being so pig headed just because you have a personal dislike of me and my team, I'm posting here for the benefit of LFS, I'm not the one throwing my weight around in a vain attempt to appear self important, Im trying to help for gods sake.

*sighs* Just my $0.02 before this thread degenerates into a flame war

Sam said in the CTRA section that he has NO problem with you. Get your head out of your ass and read the forums once in a while.

It's NOT a bug. LFS was DESIGNED that way.

DK

Why the hell is he locking and deleting my threads when I'm trying to report a bug then ? Do you consider calling a hacker, a hacker, to be so offensive the thread should be locked and all subsuquent threads deleted ?

Do you like having hackers and loopholes in LFS ?

LFS was NOT designed to let someone put 3 cars on the track, when the server is set for 1 car per guest, try it your self if you don't believe me, just try adding more than 1 car.

If you do manage to find the way to do it, you will then find that NO ONE can join the server until you leave it as everyone that tries gets a OOS - CP error, and you say this is by design ? Are you mad ?

Quote from Shoe Maker :

Why the hell is he locking and deleting my threads when I'm trying to report a bug then ? Do you consider calling a hacker, a hacker, to be so offensive the thread should be locked and all subsuquent threads deleted ?

Do you like having hackers and loopholes in LFS ?

LFS was NOT designed to let someone put 3 cars on the track, when the server is set for 1 car per guest, try it your self if you don't believe me, just try adding more than 1 car.

If you do manage to find the way to do it, you will then find that NO ONE can join the server until you leave it as everyone that tries gets a OOS - CP error, and you say this is by design ? Are you mad ?

1) It's been said several times in the last threads. IT isn't hacking. You may consider it hacking. But to the wider LFS community, it isn't.

2) LFS WAS designed to handle multiple cars on track. If you want to restrict it to 1 connection per user, fair enough, but don't be suprised when somebody tries to get round it. As was suggested, use an InSim app to spec any AIs that are put on track. That's the only way I can see this being solved.

3) I don't like having hackers or loopholes in LFS. But LFS is still VERY MUCH a WIP. You were made aware of it when you bought the S2 license.

4) I'm not mad, and I'll try it in a minute. I don't see how e-mailing Scavier can help tbh.

Please do try it and post your findings, I have a replay here in which someone forced 3 cars on to the track, when the server is set to 1 only per guest.

I tried this and was only able to put 1 car on the track.

More worrying, was the fact that no one could join the server when this player was using this 'feature' because anyone trying got a 'OOS - CP' error and got bounced out the server at which time it went in to an 'auto-reconnect' loop...

This behaviour can not be by design as anyone using this can prevent people from connecting to a server, to suggest this is a 'feature' is crazy...

1. If you can't reproduce '3 cars on the track' then I fail to see how it 'can not be a hack' as you say.

2. If someone is trying to 'get round it' is that not the definition of a hack ? I don't know of any insim apps to remove AI's from the track, got a link for one ? it would be handy...

3. Of course it's a WIP, I have been running LFS servers for over 3 years now, I know what I'm talking about, Im not some noob, new to LFS that hasn't a clue. Redline Racing ? heard of us ? You know those busy servers in the list that are usually full ? thats us, we are not beginners or novices. A WIP has bugs, and Im just trying to report one, and I don't appreciate having valid threads locked by an moderator that doesn't care to read or understand the problem I am reporting.

4. I accept you may not be mad, but who's Scavier and who's trying to email him, and what are they trying to email him about ? Are you mad ? ummmmm

I wouldn't call it hacking, but as I understand it, it's at least a bug.
If a server is set up to only allow 1 AI per connection, I don't see how you guys can claim it's normal someone puts more than 1 AI.
And "use an InSim app", it's a feature in LFS, it should work properly, if it doesn't, it's a bug.

And Scavier are the devs, I don't see why e-mailing them wouldn't help. If they ignore it, then that's that, if they can reproduce it, or find how it's possible, they can fix it. Nothing really lost there.

Quote from sgt.flippy :

Scavier are the devs, I don't see why e-mailing them wouldn't help. If they ignore it, then that's that, if they can reproduce it, or find how it's possible, they can fix it. Nothing really lost there.

Scavier ? I thought it was Scawen, my mistake perhaps ?

I was very much hoping the could find it and reproduce it, thats why I'm posting this here, but one of the forum moderators doesn't seem to want me to report this issue, he locked the first thread and he completely deleted the second thread, no telling how much longer this one will last, but I will keep trying to report it...

I consider it a hack, and not a bug, because I am unable to force 3 cars on to the track when the server is set for '1 car per guest', I don't know how the driver in the replay managed to do it, but when you force software to do something it's designed to prevent you from doing, that, in my book, is a hack, plain and simple.

It might help if others try to force more than 1 car on to the track on a server set for one car only, then post their findings here, perhaps the moderators will stop deleting my threads once they realise this is a real bug.

I'm not gonna test it, don't know much about the commands and stuff.

P.S. : Scavier: Scawen - Victor - Eric

Quote from sgt.flippy :

I'm not gonna test it, don't know much about the commands and stuff.

P.S. : Scavier: Scawen - Victor - Eric

Shouldn't it be Scavierge?

Sca(wen)Vi(ctor)Er(ic)Ge(raldine)

DK

Quote from DieKolkrabe :

Shouldn't it be Scavierge?

Sca(wen)Vi(ctor)Er(ic)Ge(raldine)

DK

Don't look at me, I didn't come up with it..

Scavier(Ge) are "the" Devs, but as Scawen deals with all the coding, it's him that will want to hear about this.

Seriously, read the first post properly and this whole argument never would of happened...

Quote from Shoe Maker :

Sorry Sam but how am I supposed to make the devs aware of this hack if you just persist in locking every thread I post in, or deleting topics I start on the subject ?---

The devs are already aware of it. The original thread continued to exist, though I modified the title to be more representative of the subject matter. I also linked to the Improvement Suggestion, where the same issue had been raised in the appropriate place. I closed your original thread because all the points about the issue had been made and because I object to you calling people hackers. It's a serious accusation that calls personal integrity into question, it's unacceptable and I will NOT allow it.

Quote from Shoe Maker :

If you force me to contact the devs directly, then I will, stop being so pig headed just because you have a personal dislike of me and my team, I'm posting here for the benefit of LFS, I'm not the one throwing my weight around in a vain attempt to appear self important, Im trying to help for gods sake.

You're not trying to help at all. You're just being your old self, objectionable, difficult, stroppy, nasty... There's no point me trying to deny that I think you suck massively, because nobody would fall for it. So if you really want to try and screw up some more peoples' Christmases, go ahead and complain to the devs again. It won't stop me locking threads where you band around "hacker" accusations at individuals. I'd stop and lock any thread where such things happen, and your threads are not above it any more than anyone else's, whether you'd like to believe it or not. And for the record, I believe you ARE the one who's trying to throw faux-weight around in a vain attempt to appear self important. I think that's exactly what you do.

Count the number of posts I make on here, and the number you make on here, then tell me Im trying to throw my weight around.

Im not the one deleting and locking threads, am I ?

If the devs were aware of it and it was being delt with, thats all you had to say, instead of the pompous attitude you came back with in the first thread before you locked it, I was just trying to help close a bug / hack, and excuse me if the 'bugs' section of the forum is the wrong place to report a bug

Quote from Shoe Maker :

Count the number of posts I make on here, and the number you make on here, then tell me Im trying to throw my weight around.

I'm an active forum member. What can I say?

Quote from Shoe Maker :

Im not the one deleting and locking threads, am I ?

I'm an active forum moderator. What can I say?

Quote from Shoe Maker :

If the devs were aware of it and it was being delt with, thats all you had to say, instead of the pompous attitude you came back with, I was just trying to help close a bug / hack, and excuse me if the 'bugs' section of the forum is the wrong place to report a bug

I heartily recommend re-reading the posts made in the original thread, and follow the link I gave to the Improvement Suggestion post.

Have we done yet? Merry Christmas!

The link you posted in the 'now locked' thread, points to an 'improvements / suggestions' thread where someone suggests it should be possible to prevent 'all' AI cars from joining a multiplayer session, and I fail to see how that relates to my post which says something quite different.

Specifically, I said that someone added 'multiple AI cars', then proceeded to join the track them selves, placing 3 cars on the track from a single S2 licenced driver, dispite the fact that the server was specifically set to '1 driver per guest' and I don't consider the improvement suggested to be the same thing at all.

When I tried to reproduce this behavior, I found I couldn't add more than 1 AI or real car at a time, it was my interpretation, therefor, that in order to effect a work around on the programmed limitation of '1 car per guest', someone had, (and I use the term loosly on the basis that you appear hyper-sensitive to it) 'hacked' something in order to force the code to do something it was specifically designed to prevent.

I always thought thats what hacking was...

The thing that concerned me most, was the fact that when this 'work around' was in use, it prevented anyone from joining the server, and again I fail to see how a 'suggested improvement to stop all AI's' is in any way similar to someone deliberately doing something that your not supposed to be able to do, and thereby preventing anyone from joining the server.

It's possible that Im the one thats being retarded here, but I just fail to see the connection between the 'improvement' suggested and the 'hack' Im trying to warn the devs of, a single AI car won't stop people joining the server and I fail to see that it's the same thing at all.

The fact you have at last, openly admitted an intense personal dislike of me, does not automatically give you the right to 'see my name' and instantly lock my threads and delete my topics, that's highly unprofessional, if you are unable to remain emotionally detached and moderate only on the basis of a published or generally understood and accepted 'code of conduct' then perhaps you shouldn't be moderating at all, moving the goal posts and having individual moderators making up their own rules and targeting individuals they dislike, is not IMHO the best way to run a forum thats supposed to be promoting a game that people are expected to pay money for !

I can't imagine a moderator on the EA Sports forums behaving in such a manor and keeping their job, for example.

After all the trouble I went to, to be nice, and to ensure that none of your members were unjustly banned from my servers after the crash that took place with one of my ex-team members on your servers, yet you still harbour an intense personal grudge of some kind?

God knows why, I must confess I find it hard to believe you really are the age you claim to be. I don't know why I ever botherd to try and be nice, however you have now made it quite clear you are not interested in being fair, or reasonable, so be it.

Now your feelings are public, perhaps you would be kind enough to stop being hypocritical and refrain from posting statements such as 'you have no problem with me or redline' in the future, tell it like it is, or better still, stay out my threads and find someone impartial to moderate them if moderation is in fact, ever needed, it's the professional thing to do.

I don't go hunting the forum for your posts and then jump in to threads that have nothing to do with me, if I post, it's because it does have something to do with me, and I'll thank you to do the same.

I've done my best to be pleasant and accomodating towards you, but at the end of the day there are some people who just represent things that are against other peoples' fibre. For me, you're one of those people. I'm perfectly within my rights to dislike you, though I've tried my damnedest not to do so.. turns out it's not an option, and don't need to apologise for it.

I'm under no obligation to make accomodations for you or treat your posts differently from anyone else's just because the world knows that I think you're awful. I'm first-and-foremost another LFSer.

Just because the truth is out (and I feel better for it) and it's now public knowledge that I think you're horrid doesn't change the fact that I locked your thread because you accused another player of hacking, without providing any evidence to substantiate the accusation.. complain away, but you won't change the fact that I locked your thread for a good reason.

I moved this thread of Off Topic, since it has nothing to do with the reported bug (which is still there for Scawen to pick up and re-open/action/dismiss/whatever, and also discussed elsewhere, where Scawen will see it) and just really comes down to the fact that two forum members can't stand each other

I don't see how else I can explain it in a way you might understand it, but in it's simplest form, someone deliberately going out the way to force the code to do something it's specifically designed not to be able to do, is hacking.

The term has many meanings, and just because I use the word 'hacker', that does not imply the pejorative, perhaps you should familiarize your self with the many various other meanings it can have and get off your high horse.

I would expect Wikipedia to have an acceptable level of reading material on the meaning of the word.

A hacker is a hacker, it's not an acronym for 'the devil' or 'satin him self', and in the context of 'ethical hacking' it's positively a good thing, it's a simple word that has a variety of meanings on a specific theme in the context of computers, that theme being, the modification of code to do something it was not designed to do, or which it was specifically designed to prevent, and so what I said was nothing more than a simple truth.

If someone then takes the modified code and does 'good things' or 'bad things' with it, thats a whole other matter, but in it's simplest terms, use of the work 'hacker' should not be grounds for locking a thread.

Quote from Shoe Maker :

I don't see how else I can explain it in a way you might understand it, but in it's simplest form, someone deliberately going out the way to force the code to do something it's specifically designed not to be able to do, is hacking.

The term has many meanings, and just because I use the word 'hacker', that does not imply the pejorative, perhaps you should familiarize your self with the many various other meanings it can have and get off your high horse.

I would expect Wikipedia to have an acceptable level of reading material on the meaning of the word.

A hacker is a hacker, it's not an acronym for 'the devil' or 'satin him self', and in the context of 'ethical hacking' it's positively a good thing, it's a simple word that has a variety of meanings on a specific theme in the context of computers, that theme being, the modification of code to do something it was not designed to do, or which it was specifically designed to prevent, and so what I said was nothing more than a simple truth.

If someone then takes the modified code and does 'good things' or 'bad things' with it, thats a whole other matter, but in it's simplest terms, use of the work 'hacker' should not be grounds for locking a thread.

"Wikipedia is made by morons, edited by morons and read by complete idiots" <--- Not my words. Also, you're getting hacking and cracking confused.

I would, in that case, expect many reading sources to have a good explanation of the term 'hacker', if you consider Wikipedia an unacceptable source of information... *sigh*

Quote from Shoe Maker :

use of the work 'hacker' should not be grounds for locking a thread.

In your opinion. On this forum, I consider that it is, because it is a slur on a person's character. Name-calling.

Quote from Shoe Maker :

The link you posted in the 'now locked' thread, points to an 'improvements / suggestions' thread where someone suggests it should be possible to prevent 'all' AI cars from joining a multiplayer session, and I fail to see how that relates to my post which says something quite different.

Specifically, I said that someone added 'multiple AI cars', then proceeded to join the track them selves, placing 3 cars on the track from a single S2 licenced driver, dispite the fact that the server was specifically set to '1 driver per guest' and I don't consider the improvement suggested to be the same thing at all.

When I tried to reproduce this behavior, I found I couldn't add more than 1 AI or real car at a time, it was my interpretation, therefor, that in order to effect a work around on the programmed limitation of '1 car per guest', someone had, (and I use the term loosly on the basis that you appear hyper-sensitive to it) 'hacked' something in order to force the code to do something it was specifically designed to prevent.

I always thought thats what hacking was...

The thing that concerned me most, was the fact that when this 'work around' was in use, it prevented anyone from joining the server, and again I fail to see how a 'suggested improvement to stop all AI's' is in any way similar to someone deliberately doing something that your not supposed to be able to do, and thereby preventing anyone from joining the server.

It's possible that Im the one thats being retarded here, but I just fail to see the connection between the 'improvement' suggested and the 'hack' Im trying to warn the devs of, a single AI car won't stop people joining the server and I fail to see that it's the same thing at all.

The fact you have at last, openly admitted an intense personal dislike of me, does not automatically give you the right to 'see my name' and instantly lock my threads and delete my topics, that's highly unprofessional, if you are unable to remain emotionally detached and moderate only on the basis of a published or generally understood and accepted 'code of conduct' then perhaps you shouldn't be moderating at all, moving the goal posts and having individual moderators making up their own rules and targeting individuals they dislike, is not IMHO the best way to run a forum thats supposed to be promoting a game that people are expected to pay money for !

I can't imagine a moderator on the EA Sports forums behaving in such a manor and keeping their job, for example.

After all the trouble I went to, to be nice, and to ensure that none of your members were unjustly banned from my servers after the crash that took place with one of my ex-team members on your servers, yet you still harbour an intense personal grudge of some kind?

God knows why, I must confess I find it hard to believe you really are the age you claim to be. I don't know why I ever botherd to try and be nice, however you have now made it quite clear you are not interested in being fair, or reasonable, so be it.

Now your feelings are public, perhaps you would be kind enough to stop being hypocritical and refrain from posting statements such as 'you have no problem with me or redline' in the future, tell it like it is, or better still, stay out my threads and find someone impartial to moderate them if moderation is in fact, ever needed, it's the professional thing to do.

I don't go hunting the forum for your posts and then jump in to threads that have nothing to do with me, if I post, it's because it does have something to do with me, and I'll thank you to do the same.

Quote from Shoe Maker :

I don't see how else I can explain it in a way you might understand it, but in it's simplest form, someone deliberately going out the way to force the code to do something it's specifically designed not to be able to do, is hacking.

The term has many meanings, and just because I use the word 'hacker', that does not imply the pejorative, perhaps you should familiarize your self with the many various other meanings it can have and get off your high horse.

I would expect Wikipedia to have an acceptable level of reading material on the meaning of the word.

A hacker is a hacker, it's not an acronym for 'the devil' or 'satin him self', and in the context of 'ethical hacking' it's positively a good thing, it's a simple word that has a variety of meanings on a specific theme in the context of computers, that theme being, the modification of code to do something it was not designed to do, or which it was specifically designed to prevent, and so what I said was nothing more than a simple truth.

If someone then takes the modified code and does 'good things' or 'bad things' with it, thats a whole other matter, but in it's simplest terms, use of the work 'hacker' should not be grounds for locking a thread.

Quote from Shoe Maker :

I would, in that case, expect many reading sources to have a good explanation of the term 'hacker', if you consider Wikipedia an unacceptable source of information... *sigh*

Wikipedia's generally criticised for not being factually accurate.

DK

DieKolkrabe - thats one major league, serious 'quote' you have going on there for a 'one line response' regarding the dictionary definition of a simple word, that didn't really need quotes in the first place... and I would even go so far as to suggest that Wiki won't be far off the mark with what ever they have on the subject... it's not particle physics, it's a simple word definition, however I expect, that for what ever reason, you're going to disagree with this statement and you will feel obligated to come back with a pointless response of some kind....

Name calling Sam? hmm, so your allowed to call people names, but no one else is ? or is it just me thats not ?

Quote :

I've done my best to be pleasant and accomodating towards you

There you go being all 'hyprocritical' again... the fact is you have gone out your way to post pointless objection after pointless objection to just about every post I ever made

Quote :

but at the end of the day there are some people who just represent things that are against other peoples' fibre. For me, you're one of those people.

Agreed, and after much hounding, goading and pressing, I now feel the same way about you because you won't stay off my back, congratulations, there are very few people in that have that accolade.

Quote :

I'm perfectly within my rights to dislike you, though I've tried my damnedest not to do so.. turns out it's not an option, and don't need to apologise for it.

Agreed, as stated, I feel the same way, thing is though, no one is asking you to appologise for it, I simply requested that you stay the hell off my back as you seem incapable or remaining objective and impartial when it comes to interpreting and responding to anything I say, and thats just unprofessional.

Quote :

I'm under no obligation to make accomodations for you or treat your posts differently from anyone else's just because the world knows that I think you're awful. I'm first-and-foremost another LFSer.

BINGO, you hit the nail on the head there hahahahahaha, thats funny... You are not obligated to treat my posts differently to everyone else, but what you can't see is, YOU DO. Things that other people can post and nothing gets said, if I post, you lock my threads or delete my topics, thats not the same treatment everyone else gets and thats EXACTLY what my complaint with you is, your incapable of remaining impartial and you just react because you dispise me, and that means I get unfair treatment from you.

Quote :

Just because the truth is out (and I feel better for it) and it's now public knowledge that I think you're horrid doesn't change the fact that I locked your thread because you accused another player of hacking, without providing any evidence to substantiate the accusation.. complain away, but you won't change the fact that I locked your thread for a good reason.

What evidence do you want exactly ? the replay that we made it clear we had from the outset ? Would that do it for you ? We thought better of posting it publicly because posting replays is FROWNED upon, isn't it ? There is just no pleasing some people....

Instead of politely asking for the replay to see for your self the 'proof', you just lock the thread and make half cocked statements about what you think the thread is about, even though it's clear you have either not bothered to read it before waving your LOCK stick, or you were incapable of understanding it.

The thread had nothing to do with adding a single AI car to the track, after all, had you bothered to read it, you would have known that, but no, you see my name, and the lock stick gets waved.

Which brings me back to the 'impartial' treatment thing again.

You don't think clearly, you just react in a way as to try and dismiss what I say or to make out that Im wrong or that I'm, and I quote 'objectionable, difficult, stroppy, nasty...' and that I 'suck massively'.

And you have the audacity to sit there and tell me that saying 'hacker' is name calling and that it's not allowed.

I will use the word 'hypocrite' advisedly, I don't need to substantiate that, or qualify it with 'proof', simply read your own words and look up the meaning of the word 'hypocrite' (although not on wikipedia apparently) and then, as if by magic, just like the 'hacker' remark, it makes the leap from 'slander' to 'statement of undeniable fact'.

If you were fair, impartial, and you treated my posts with the same regard you treat everyone elses, we wouldn't be having this conversation now, take for example the thread located here :-

http://www.lfsforum.net/showth ... highlight=hack&page=2

where they discuss the topic of hacking at length, even a forum moderator joined in, did the thread get instantly locked ? NO

or this thread :-

http://www.lfsforum.net/showth ... =33187&highlight=hack

Where they also discuss a hacked server, did it get instantly locked the second someone said 'hack' ? NO

In fact, the first thread that brought us here, didn't get locked until I started posting in it, but you still say you give me the same treatment as everyone else ?

For the last time, if you can't be impartial, get the hell off my back, will you ?

Quote from Shoe Maker :

I simply requested that you stay the hell off my back as you seem incapable or remaining objective and impartial when it comes to interpreting and responding to anything I say, and thats just unprofessional.

I won't stay off your back at all, if you post badly I'll address it. You seem to have some psychosis thing going on where you actually think I give a damn about you posting on this forum. The only time I take ANY interest is when you do dumbass things, such as accusing people of baseless things like hacking, or posting inflammatory thread titles etc.

If you think I'm always in pursuit of you on this forum, then I'll point out that very few people post so objectionably as you, as often as you do. The attention you get from me is directly in proportion to the utter crap and spite that you post.. and has absolutely nothing to do with me disliking you, except that the lack of pleasantness and general offensiveness and aggression in your posts provide the basis for roughly 50% of the reason for me doing so.

There aren't many people that I don't get on with, or that I find that I am just disgusted by. You're one of them. Nobody can like everybody, but at least I feel wholly satisfied that my reasons are easy to justify and plain to see.

And for the record, if you continue to post nasty, offensive, unsupported or unnecessary crap, I will continue to shoot down your threads. And if you don't sort yourself out, once and for all, pretty damn soon, I may well resort to forum banning. Yes, if you deserve it, you'll get it.. just like anyone else would.

as you have a personal problem with certain ppl on this forum sam (myself included im sure) i think you should stand down as a moderator or atleast as shoe maker has ask get off her back, or just leave your so called moderating duty to somone else (not in the ctra team) like franky, i mean its not like the forums would fall to pieces without you freaking out every time you see a redline member posting in "your" forum is it. just what are you trying to achive by locking threads for no reason and treatening to ban paying members from the forums because of your personal dislike of them?